The Duty To Act
The duty to act is and will be a controversial issue that has existed over time, mainly due to its biblical
Origin. The parable of the Good Samaritan, the ‘Neighbour principle’ in Leviticus 19:16 “Do not stand
By while your neighbour’s blood is split and the moral teaching of the story of Cain and Abel. The
General rule of no liability for omission obstructs the duty to act, this then provides different
Approaches in the Law of different jurisdictions. A bystander found failing to assist a third party
Whose life is at risk is persecuted differently by Common and Civil law. The responses between these
Jurisdictions have been described as ‘striking’ and ‘astonishing’ among scholars, possibly due to the accustomed notion of a moral …show more content…
The Common Law fail to accept such views as the courts oppose the notion that a person should be held criminally liable for an omission unless he or she was under a statutory duty to act or held a special relationship with the victim. This starts the argument that the common law approach to this principle is inadequate and the Criminal law is in need of reform.
One of the essential features of the law needed to function is certainty and clarity. The Common law fails to provide clarity and certainty in this principle. This paper will discuss concepts of a legal duty to rescue, provide rescue laws that have been adopted by other European counter parts [French duty to rescue as a case study], investigate the Common Law problems regarding this principle, respond to the common law objections to criminalise omission, possible Legal reform and finally that an introduction of a general Duty to Rescue law is needed to breach the gap of the law and promote legal certainty and clarity.
The ‘Bad Samaritan’ is subject to be punished by rescue laws and Feinberg has described …show more content…
However, manslaughter is an especially serious offence, and that consideration makes it all the more important that the law should be clear and predictable, complying with art.7 and rule-of-law
Origin. The parable of the Good Samaritan, the ‘Neighbour principle’ in Leviticus 19:16 “Do not stand
By while your neighbour’s blood is split and the moral teaching of the story of Cain and Abel. The
General rule of no liability for omission obstructs the duty to act, this then provides different
Approaches in the Law of different jurisdictions. A bystander found failing to assist a third party
Whose life is at risk is persecuted differently by Common and Civil law. The responses between these
Jurisdictions have been described as ‘striking’ and ‘astonishing’ among scholars, possibly due to the accustomed notion of a moral …show more content…
The Common Law fail to accept such views as the courts oppose the notion that a person should be held criminally liable for an omission unless he or she was under a statutory duty to act or held a special relationship with the victim. This starts the argument that the common law approach to this principle is inadequate and the Criminal law is in need of reform.
One of the essential features of the law needed to function is certainty and clarity. The Common law fails to provide clarity and certainty in this principle. This paper will discuss concepts of a legal duty to rescue, provide rescue laws that have been adopted by other European counter parts [French duty to rescue as a case study], investigate the Common Law problems regarding this principle, respond to the common law objections to criminalise omission, possible Legal reform and finally that an introduction of a general Duty to Rescue law is needed to breach the gap of the law and promote legal certainty and clarity.
The ‘Bad Samaritan’ is subject to be punished by rescue laws and Feinberg has described …show more content…
However, manslaughter is an especially serious offence, and that consideration makes it all the more important that the law should be clear and predictable, complying with art.7 and rule-of-law